Positive Discrimination - Positive Action

[JBR]

I think I know your wife mate. Is she a driver joiner?

How do you know my wife? She works at a mental health centre.

Oh...

 

[Big Tone]

Good point Wobs!

What hasn't been mentioned yet, (I think), is what it's known by elsewhere; Affirmative Action. More play on words for discrimination?

The link here has more information you can shake a stick at. And the criticism part is very telling.

"Opponents of affirmative action such as George Sher believe that affirmative action devalues the accomplishments of people who are chosen based on the social group to which they belong rather than their qualifications, thus rendering affirmative action counterproductive.[78] Opponents,[79] who sometimes say that affirmative action is "reverse discrimination", further claim that affirmative action has undesirable side-effects in addition to failing to achieve its goals. They argue that it hinders reconciliation, replaces old wrongs with new wrongs, undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups (such as lower-class whites)."

 

[wobs]

Good point Wobs!

What hasn't been mentioned yet, (I think), is what it's known by elsewhere; Affirmative Action. More play on words for discrimination?

The link here has more information you can shake a stick at. And the criticism part is very telling.

"Opponents of affirmative action such as George Sher believe that affirmative action devalues the accomplishments of people who are chosen based on the social group to which they belong rather than their qualifications, thus rendering affirmative action counterproductive.[78] Opponents,[79] who sometimes say that affirmative action is "reverse discrimination", further claim that affirmative action has undesirable side-effects in addition to failing to achieve its goals. They argue that it hinders reconciliation, replaces old wrongs with new wrongs, undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups (such as lower-class whites)."

Thanks for the link. I was trying to remember the name of a great critic of affirmative action, and he's mentioned in the article:
Thomas Sowell - He's written books on the subject, and has noted its ineffectiveness. There's an interesting interview with him about it on line as well somewhere.

 

[Big Tone]

Thanks to you Wobs, I'd forgotten about him. Enter his name on You Tube and there's loads of good stuff, and common sense.

 

[Brigadier]

Good point Wobs!

What hasn't been mentioned yet, (I think), is what it's known by elsewhere; Affirmative Action. More play on words for discrimination?

The link here has more information you can shake a stick at. And the criticism part is very telling.

"Opponents of affirmative action such as George Sher believe that affirmative action devalues the accomplishments of people who are chosen based on the social group to which they belong rather than their qualifications, thus rendering affirmative action counterproductive.[78] Opponents,[79] who sometimes say that affirmative action is "reverse discrimination", further claim that affirmative action has undesirable side-effects in addition to failing to achieve its goals. They argue that it hinders reconciliation, replaces old wrongs with new wrongs, undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups (such as lower-class whites)."

"Replaces old wrongs with new wrongs" - couldn't have put it better myself!

Thanks BT.

 

[JBR]

The link here has more information you can shake a stick at. And the criticism part is very telling.

Yes. As long as positive discrimination continues there will always be accusations of tokenism imposed on 'minority persons' who are seen to be in positions of authority or advantage.

This is something that I am sure such people despise, but the damage has already been done by the 'equality brigade', who are obviously too naive and stupid for words.

When I was at college they would, every year, wheel out a black headmaster just to prove that black people could achieve such a position. A good friend of mine - a black lady - was furious at this and told me that she felt patronised.

If they wanted true equality, the idea of positive discrimination should never have been thought of, let alone instigated. Too late now, I'm afraid; rightly or wrongly, the possibility of tokenism will inevitably cross people's minds.

 

[Big Tone]

Yes, that part hit me like a wet fish in the face too Brigs. And yes JBR, it's so obvious and cringeworthy to see the token minority face.

There was a Party Political Broadcast the other day I watched. The BS was rife! Black face, cuz we're not racist, get the little child in there too, cuz we love family values and ain't they a cute vote winner...

One thing I will say is I have had two jobs in my life through a friend/nepotism and the thought that you only got it that way, instead of on merit competing with others, never escapes you. (Until you leave that job).

It may of course not bother many or most, but it bugged the hell out of me. I can hold my head high now. I work on scaffolding (I'm getting worse than Joe )

 

[groovynooby]

Artificial mechanisms to force change are never a good idea, it's like the last Labour government's attempt to push multi-culturalism, has it worked?

Little by little, given time, things change and equilibrium is achieved, artificially forcing things one way or another just generates opposing forces that leads to unhappiness on both sides of the equation.

As I said previously, change comes from future generations who will grow up in and into a different world, we need to let that happen instead of trying to engineer things into how 'some' people think they should be already.

Unfortunately, intelligence is no measure of common sense.

 

[RogueHanger]

racism in its true interpretation, i.e. a belief in superiority of one race over another.

Do you think the abbo's were equal in every way? I think the whites that ultimately took over Aus were more advanced technically. Does that make me racist? A boatload of trained marines with guns are far superior to tribe of people still living in mud huts and grubbuing around in the dirt for food, when it comes to combat skills. Am I racist for noticing this? Or anm I just stating a plain fact?

Supisingly, on one level, your comments are not singularly racist.
However, the motivation behind the British subjugating, eliminating, culture-destroying and prejudice was, without doubt a policy based on racism.
As I suspect, was you view of the history, it's ramifications and its results.
Why do I suspect that, a) because of your use of an unaccaptable reference to aborigines, b) because of you use of such terminology as "grubbuing" (sic) around and c) because of your viewpoint that the British were superior. If they were so superior, how come they didn't realise the racist horrific and sadistic practises would destoy a culture and very nearly a whole race of people? As it is it's left that race of people nearly destitute and severly disadvantaged and traumatised.

 

[longdogs]

The BBC fits nicely into the positive discrimination category. Just watch the local news programmes or morning programmes. News items such as children learning computers at school, directing a play, singing etc - black.

News stories such as people on benefits, getting drunk, crime etc - white.

 

[RogueHanger]

So would an employer be justified in discriminating against employing a woman because statisticly they spend less time at work, that follows the same logic.

Legally, no... though in the case of a very small employer, where the implications of a pregnant employee could be significant, it may be understandable.

Understandable and unjustifiable are different concepts.
A judge might say, duing summing up, "I can undestand why you acted the way you did, but it is/was against the law."

In the case of car insurance though female drivers have generally seen their policy costs increase so I'm not sure it's a piece of equality legislation that they would approve of.
Everything about insurance is based on a calculated gamble, the cost of the premium reflects the likelihood of a member of the group you fit into claiming and how much that claim is likely to be, hence young drivers who are more likely to have expensive accidents are charged through the nose.

You are measured on all attributes that the company care to gather (age, occupation, area, etc), with the exception of gender, and compared against a set of statistics that allow them to establish the level of risk you potentially represent - the policy cost will hopefully, if priced correctly, allow the insurance company to have a large enough pool of money to meet it's obligations with regards to payouts and also net the shareholders a profit..

Agreed. I think we might be mixing up the actual ruling about the premiums for women going up. I can't recall the actual ruling but Insurance companies can asses the risk and quote a premium accordingly. e.g. expensive cars, previous accidents, locality, garaged or on-road parking, etc.

I would imagine that if equality came into it we would all be charged the same price and that would probably be the highest.

No doubt and they'd blame the equality act.

 

[RogueHanger]

The BBC fits nicely into the positive discrimination category. Just watch the local news programmes or morning programmes. News items such as children learning computers at school, directing a play, singing etc - black.

News stories such as people on benefits, getting drunk, crime etc - white.

I'm sure the BBC are not practising Positive Discrimination. I think you're mistaken.

 

[RogueHanger]

 

But ageism is justified in this case, if you can call it that.  If you have just passed your test in your late teens there’s no way you will be anything like as safe as a 40 or 50 year old veteran driver.  That’s not ageism, that’s a fact! 

I think you're misunderstanding the insurance companies risk assesment.
Additionally Positive Action is volountary.

It’s going back to ‘all are equal but some are more equal’ because you can’t tell it as it is, no matter how true.  This is why I dislike the stuffy PC brigade.

Just who do you think are the ones who are "more equal"?
And can you explain you idea fully?

 

[RogueHanger]

In the Far East they respect people who do any job, however ostensibly and ignorantly humble in Western eyes...

The West are clueless to this concept, sadly. But that's for another day on social media I expect......

I don't think the "job dictates the value, thus the status of the person" is a purley easten concept.
I find that most countries have a more egalitarian view of their fellow citizens, irrespective of their job.
I find France, Germany and Australia to be more egalitarian than UK.

On the contrary I don't find that eastern countries have an egalitarian approach.
My perception is that your profession may entitle you to an unfair advantage in the far eastern counties that I've visited.
And in the midlle eastern countries it's been a very much "who you know" that matters.

 

[RogueHanger]

Women on average choose jobs that a closer to home, are shorter hours, and more comfortable. Much of this leads to less driving.

I think that's bonkers.
Some women I know travel much further than I would have considered, but they are younger than me.
So, a) I think it's an age thing, younger (ambitious) people are prepared to travel much further.
b) it depends very much on which connurbation you live close to. I suspect the average Londoner, Parisian, etc, travels further than the average Bristolian, etc.
c) some long distance commuters that I know, use public transport.

So, there are many influences. I really don't think gender is one of them.